Pluralidad Religiosa

Spatial visualization ability (Vz) is a subfactor of spatial ability that is relevant to many disciplines of science, including biology (Russell-Gebbett, 1984; Rochford, 1985; Russell-Gebbett, 1985; Macnab and Johnstone, 1990; Eun-mi et al., 2003), chemistry (Carter et al., 1987; Pribyl and Bodner, 1987; Coleman and Gotch, 1998; Eun-mi et al., 2003), and physics (Kozhevnikov et al., 2007). As applied to anatomy education, Vz tasks often involve imagining the shape and relation of anatomical structures in both three-dimensions and two-dimensional cross-sections. Russell-Gebbett (1984) identified two skills often used by secondary school pupils to understand three-dimensional

structures in biology. These discrete skills include the ability to infer the shapes of cross- sections of anatomical structures and the ability to understand the spatial relationships among the internal parts in the anatomical cross-sections. Further analysis revealed that these skills were positively correlated with success on 3-D biology problems (Russell- Gebbett, 1985). Rochford (1985) found a positive correlation between Vz and

achievement among medical students at the University of Cape Town. High Vz students achieved consistently higher marks than low Vz students on both practical anatomy examinations and multiple-choice anatomy questions classified as being spatially three-

dimensional. Recently, Lufler et al. (2012) found similar results when assessing medical students at Boston University School of Medicine. High Vz students achieved

consistently higher marks than their low Vz counterparts on both practical and written examinations.

In addition to practical anatomy task performance, Vz has also been correlated with functional anatomy task performance (Guillot et al., 2007), cross-sectional anatomy task performance (Cohen and Hegarty, 2007; Hegarty and Kriz, 2008), and surgical task performance (Wanzel et al., 2002). Findings such as these suggest that there is a strong visuospatial component to the way anatomical information is mentally represented. It also implies that low Vz individuals will have a harder time constructing, maintaining, and manipulating internal visualizations of anatomy.

In many of these studies, however, performance on the anatomy tasks may reflect other abilities or competencies in addition to Vz. For example, in Cohen and Hegarty’s (2007) cross-sectional study, participants were given an egg-shaped object with a transparent exterior that revealed an internal network of duct-like structures. In the experimental trials, a superimposed vertical or horizontal line on the printed images indicated where participants should imagine the object had been sliced. An arrow indicated the orientation from which the participants were to imagine the cross-section. Participants were asked to draw the cross-section that would result if the object were sliced at the line and viewed from the perspective of the arrow. In this study, performance on the task might reflect drawing ability rather than spatial visualization. Similarly, in Guillot et al. (2007) study, participants were asked to relate written anatomical questions to visual images, and performance on the task might reflect verbal comprehension rather than spatial anatomy comprehension. Based on these findings, more research is needed to establish the relationship between Vz and visuospatial anatomy task performance.

While Vz is shown to predict anatomy learning through traditional methods, more recently it has also been shown to influence anatomy learning from computer

visualizations (Garg et al., 1999; 2001; 2002; Huk, 2006; Hoffler and Leutner, 2011). However, there are disagreements as to possible aptitude-treatment interactions. For

example, some studies have demonstrated that instruction with animations (compared to static representations) augments the performance of high Vz individuals more than low Vz individuals. Garg et al. (1999; 2001; 2002) conducted a series of experiments

comparing the usefulness of animation and static representations for learning wrist bone anatomy. In the first experiment, students received three-minute learning sessions with either an auto-rotating animation (anatomy self rotating at 10° intervals in the horizontal plane) or static key-view representations (anatomy self rotating by 180° in the horizontal plane) (Garg et al., 1999). In the second experiment, students were allowed active control over the presentation. Those using the animation were allowed to actively rotate the anatomical structures through the multiple views, while those viewing the static images were restricted to rotating the structures in the anterior and posterior views (Garg et al., 2001). In the third experiment, both groups were again allowed active control over the presentation. The rotation was unconstrained for participants viewing the animation but restricted to a “wiggle” (+/- 10° rotation around the anterior and posterior orientations) for those viewing key-view representations (Garg et al., 2002). After each study phase, an anatomical knowledge test assessed participants’ learning. Overall, the authors found that animation had no instructional advantage over the key-view images. Further analysis revealed that animations hinder anatomy learning for individuals with poor Vz. For these students, learning was only effective if the display was restricted to a simple depiction entailing just two cardinal views. Findings such as these suggest that animations might actually impair spatial understanding for low Vz individuals. More recently, Huk (2006) examined the impact of interactive 3-D models on learning about the structure of plant and animal cells. Test scores in a subsequent knowledge acquisition test demonstrated a significant interaction between Vz (high, low) and learning with interactive animations. While high Vz learners did better with the animation than without them, the opposite was true for low Vz learners, whose performance was poorer in the presence of the animation. By contrast, other studies have shown that instruction with animations (compared to static representations) augments the performance of low Vz individuals more than high Vz individuals. Hoffler and Leutner (2011) conducted two experiments to evaluate the role of Vz in learning from an instructional animation versus a series of static images. In both studies, test scores in a subsequent knowledge test revealed significant interaction

between Vz and type of visualization. When learning with static images, Vz correlated with learning outcomes; students with high Vz performed better than those with low Vz. When learning with animations, however, learning outcome was independent of Vz; students with low Vz performed just as well as their high Vz counterparts.

2.3.2

Summary

Spatial visualization ability (Vz), which can be seen as a measure of internal visualization (Hegarty, 2004a), is correlated with performance on a number of anatomy tasks;

however, its role in visuospatial anatomy task performance is still unclear. Furthermore, instruction with different computer visualizations modulates the effects of Vz on task performance; however, there are disagreements as to the aptitude-treatment interaction between Vz and format of the computer visualization.